Cry Havoc! And let slip the dogs of war!
In the fall of 2001, a few dozen special forces soldiers, combined with existing anti-Taliban militia and overwhelming American airpower, succeeded in short order in deposing the Taliban regime. While the Taliban obviously didn't go away, they have a regional base inside Afghanistan to fall back on. Ghaddafi/Qadafy does not have such a base. If his regime collapses, he has nowhere to go but exile. His regime is wrapped up in HIM, his person. That's not the same as the Taliban.
So, while Kosovo is one parallel, Afghanistan is another.
Of course, the endgame in Libya could also look like the endgame in Afghanistan. Tribal conflict, kleptocrats fighting over state money, little governmental control outside of the cities. Chaos.
But it will be Libya's chaos. Just like it's Egypt's chaos and Tunisia's chaos. (And maybe Syria, Bharain, Yeman and Jordan's chaos.)
It's essential that this distinction be understood. The problem with Iraq is that Iraqis didn't get rid of Saddam Hussein. They were invaded and told what they could and could not do by the CPA. They were made subjects of American rule, fired from their jobs, ignored as to how to run their own country. (Read Imperial Life In The Emerald City for a comprehensive take on this.)
That's why "no boots on the ground" is not just for domestic politics, it's about Libyan politics, too.
For those like Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul who can't tell the difference between ANY forms of military/diplomatic action, this is a distinction that eludes them.
No comments:
Post a Comment